DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-11, 16-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over various claims (See below) of U.S. Patent No. 11,700,635, 11,089,605, 10,405,326, and 12,120,728. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are merely a slightly broader version of the ‘635 and ‘728 claims as well as the reciprocal version of the ‘326 and ‘605 claims (i.e. terminal side vs. network side):
Instant Claim 1
‘728 Claim 9
‘635 Claim 19
‘605 Claims 16 + 17
‘326 Claims 16 + 17
A wireless device comprising: a wireless transceiver; a radio frequency (RF) energy harvester; and a processor configured to: provide, via the wireless transceiver,
A device comprising: a transceiver; and a processor configured to: provide, via the transceiver,
A method comprising: providing, via a transceiver of a device,
(reciprocal version) A network coordinator, comprising: a wireless transceiver configured to provide access to a wireless network; and a controller configured to:
(reciprocal version) A network coordinator, comprising: a wireless transceiver configured to provide access to a wireless network; and a controller configured to:
a first communication indicative that the wireless device is powered by energy harvesting to receive an allocation of a priority timeslot of a superframe for communication over a network,
a first communication that includes a flag indicating that the device is powered by energy harvesting to receive an allocation of a priority timeslot of a superframe for communication over a network,
a first communication that includes a flag indicating that the device is powered by energy harvesting to receive an allocation of a priority timeslot of a superframe for communication over a network,
determine whether each of a first wireless device … that is wirelessly communicating with the network coordinator is powered via energy harvesting;
determine whether a wireless device that is wirelessly communicating with the network coordinator is powered via energy harvesting; and schedule, based on a determination that the wireless device is powered by energy harvesting, the wireless device to communicate via the wireless network using a priority timeslot of a superframe of the wireless network,
wherein the priority timeslot occurs at an initial portion of the superframe; after providing the first communication, receive, via the wireless transceiver, the allocation of the priority timeslot; and
wherein the priority timeslot occurs at an initial portion of the superframe; after providing the flag, receive, via the transceiver, the allocation of the priority timeslot; and
wherein the priority timeslot occurs at an initial portion of the superframe; after providing the flag, receiving, via the transceiver, the allocation of the priority timeslot;
and schedule, based on a determination that the first wireless device is powered by energy harvesting… (claim 17) wherein the controller is further configured to extract, from a wireless transmission of the first wireless device, information indicating whether the first wireless device is powered by energy harvesting …
wherein the priority timeslot is a timeslot occurring in an initial portion of the superframe… (claim 17) wherein the controller is further configured to extract, from a wireless transmission of the wireless device, information indicating whether the wireless device is powered by energy harvesting
provide, via the wireless transceiver, a second communication during the priority timeslot.
provide, via the transceiver, a second communication during the priority timeslot.
… and providing a second communication that indicates the sensor measurement during the first priority timeslot.
… the first wireless device to communicate via the wireless network using a priority first timeslot of a superframe of the wireless network
… the wireless device to communicate via the wireless network using a priority timeslot of a superframe of the wireless network…
RE Claim 2, See ‘635 Claim 19, ‘728 Claim 10.
RE Claim 3, See ‘728 Claim 11.
RE Claim 4, See ‘728 Claim 11.
RE Claim 5, See ‘728 Claim 11.
RE Claim 6, See ‘728 Claim 11.
RE Claim 7, See ‘635 Claim 20, ‘728 Claim 12.
RE Claim 8, See ‘635 Claim 20, ‘728 Claim 13.
RE Claim 9, See ‘635 Claim 4, ‘728 Claim 19.
RE Claim 10, See ‘605 Claim 8, ‘728 Claim 20.
RE Claim 11, See ‘635 Claim 19, ‘728 Claim 9, ‘605 Claim 17, ‘326 Claim 17.
RE Claim 16, See ‘728 Claim 7.
RE Claim 17, See ‘635 Claim 2.
RE Claim 18, See ‘635 Claim 3, ‘605 Claim 4, ‘326 Claim 4.
RE Claim 19, See ‘635 Claim 8.
RE Claim 20, See ‘728 Claim 3, ‘326 Claim 7, ‘635 Claim 23.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bermak et al. (US# 8,629,386 – which teaches of energy harvesting with sensing element), Wilhelmsson et al. (US# 2015/0009897 – which teaches of determining and changing operation modes during energy harvesting).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steve R Young whose telephone number is (571)270-7518. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chirag G Shah can be reached at (571) 272-3144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/STEVE R YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights